arXiv AI By Zhipeng Bao, Wenjie Zhao, Tianle Zhu, Haohua Que, Chence Yang, Geng Yuan, Qianwen Li

AnchorReasoning: A Visual Grounding and Causal Reasoning Dataset in Long-Tail Autonomous Driving Scenarios

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2609. 28366v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) offer a promising approach to long-tail autonomous driving, but existing driving datasets provide limited supervision for connecting decision-critical visual evidence with reasoning and planning.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Aug 5

Deferred Exposure of Future Trajectories for Verifiable Reasoning in Autonomous Driving VLMs

arXiv:2608. 01755v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models for autonomous driving (AD) increasingly utilize chain-of-thought (CoT) supervision to enhance the reasoning capabilities of their Vision-Language Model (VLM) components, yet existing annotation pipelines commonly expose the teacher model to the logged ground-truth (GT) future trajectory.

By Zixuan Huang, Yang Zhou, Kaixuan Wang, Guli Zhang, Hongyan Xie, Yakun Zhu, Hao Geng, Xiaozhi Chen, Yikun Ban, Deqing Wang
arXiv AI
Jun 17

DriveJudge: Rethinking Autonomous Driving Evaluation with Vision-Language Models

arXiv:2606. 17362v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous driving has shifted towards end-to-end policy learning, where reliable, interpretable policy evaluation is a fundamental challenge as driving quality is highly context-dependent.

By Xinglong Sun, Kevin Xie, Jenny Schmalfuss, Despoina Paschalidou, Xiuming Zhang, Sanja Fidler, Kashyap Chitta, Jose M. Alvarez
arXiv Computer Vision
2d ago

CAR-VLA: Complexity-Aware and Risk-Adaptive Reasoning for Autonomous Driving

CAR‑VLA is a Vision‑Language‑Action model for autonomous driving that jointly considers scene complexity and dynamic risk to determine reasoning depth, urgency, and focus. It maps four complexity‑risk categories to three reasoning modes—Fast Intuition, Slow Thinking, and Reflex Response—each tailored to different driving scenarios. The model is trained via progressive supervised learning and reinforcement learning, achieving competitive performance on NAVSIM and Navhard benchmarks and demonstrating risk‑aware reasoning in high‑risk scenarios.

By Xiaolei Chen, Zhuolin He, Yuxuan Liang, Xu Li, Haotian Chen, Fan Shi, Mengyang Zhao, Wenjuan Meng, Zisheng Chen, Zhihao Zhu, Zhounan Jin, Hengli Wang, Qingfan Wang, Jiamei Liang, Bin Li, Xiangyang Xue